Network administration services have become indispensable as businesses rely more heavily on Local Area Networks (“LANs”) connected to the Internet to interact with their customers and their employees. Personnel capable of delivering those services are therefore in high demand and have accordingly become very expensive to maintain on staff. Mobile personnel able to provide high quality network administration services on a part-time basis, but on short notice, to more than one business are therefore a desirable resource when they are able to provide an essential service for an acceptable price. Further, keeping mission critical technical infrastructure functioning correctly in times of a threat—one example is where a threat to a building forces the evacuation—all the critical systems and infrastructure are left inside the building while the IT (information technology) staff are outside—unable to take the actions necessary to protect the network by performing administration functions including locking down core systems and users.
Without dedicating costly office space either on or off-site, or any other form of physical infrastructure that unnecessarily restricts the location of operation of a service or the mobility of the personnel supply those services, wireless technologies are a desirable means through which to deliver network administration services. Unfortunately, conventional methods of wireless communication are insufficient (in both capacity and security) for use administering networks such as LANs.
Known conventional technologies for administering networks wirelessly include those accessed through a web browser, using a standard micro-browser client/application running on any of a variety of PDAs (Personal Digital Assistants), pagers, data capable cell phones or other Wireless Input Devices (“WIDs”) to access a web-server connected to the LAN or other network of managed entities whether in hardware or in software (including: servers, routers, desktops, modems, printers, switches, mainframes, serial or parallel devices, pagers, data capable phones, applications, services, or processes). These traditional approaches take advantage of existing infrastructure to provide an inexpensive and flexible (i.e., client WIDs need not be prepared or have client software loaded) way to access managed entities, but disadvantageously increase the risk of unauthorized access to the LAN through the web-server component of the service, a risk that is not acceptable to many businesses.
Wireless Transport Layer Security (WTLS) is based on Transport Layer Security (TLS) (similar to Secure Sockets Layer, SSL). WTLS was developed to address the problems of mobile network devices, including: narrow bandwidth, high latency environment, limited processing power and memory capacity. TLS was modified to address the needs of wireless users because radio networks do not provide end-to-end security. TLS is a protocol that is the successor to SSL. TLS has two layers: the TLS Record Protocol and the TLS Handshake Protocol. The Handshake Protocol allows the server and client to authenticate each other and to negotiate an encryption algorithm and cryptographic keys before data are exchanged. The Record Protocol provides session security using a particular method of encryption such as the Data Encryption Standard (DES), but can be used without encryption. TLS and SSL are not generally interoperable, but TLS can export for SSL.
Wireless Application Protocol (“WAP”) uses a specially developed protocol stack to implement the part of the wireless transmission from a WAP client device to a WAP Gateway. The WAP architecture replaces the current web server technology for the portion of data communication between a wireless device and the web server. A WAP Gateway implements the Internet protocol stack on behalf of the WAP client device. Since TCP/IP is not used for communication between the WAP client and the WAP Gateway, SSL or TLS could not be used to implement the security. WTLS can sustain the low bandwidth, high latency transport layer and is derived from TLS by removing the overhead where possible without compromising security that makes the protocol suitable for the wireless environment. Like TLS, WTLS operates on top of the wireless transport layer also known as WDP, and below the session layer known as WSP. However, WTLS runs on top of an unreliable datagram service, and not a reliable transport protocol like TCP/IP, creating reliability concerns respecting message exchanges across several WTLS operations. WTLS also uses digital certificates to provide for server or client side authentication, but due to the memory limitation of WAP devices certain desirable attributes are omitted from the digital certificate specifications, including the Serial Number and Issuer ID fields. A WAP Gateway is responsible for the translation of messages from one protocol to another. Just like it encodes text based WML (Wireless Markup Language) content into binary WML format before sending it on its way on the air, it has to decrypt TLS encoded messages, convert the content into binary format, encrypt it using WTLS and then send it on its way. The same happens when the message arrives from the WAP device. It must be decrypted, decoded and the resulting WML re-encrypted using TLS specifications and then forwarded to the applications server. Consequently, the WAP Gateway sees all messages in clear text, including messages intended to be confidential throughout the transmission are exposed for a split second, and that is what is known as the WAP Gap, which can be addressed by setting up an internal WAP Gateway accessible only by users of the application and configuring devices to use the new gateway for access to WAP content. Although some WAP devices support multiple gateway configurations, switching between them as the users navigate from one application to another is difficult. Most companies that deploy an end-to-end secure solution require their users to carry phones with pre-set gateway configurations and access to WAP applications hosted on their servers only. Despite the recent advent of WAP v. 2.0, this is currently the only known way to ensure end-to-end secure communications between a WAP device and an application server.
The web protocol used to communicate between the web-server and the micro-browser depends on the type of WID deployed. Some WIDs are capable of handling HTML such that they can be used for “direct access” to the web-server. Other WIDs are designed or set up to handle the more compact WML, such that, although their speed of operation is higher, they must access the web-server through a WAP Gateway making them subject to the WAP gap. Some conventional web-server implemented wireless services operate without encryption, while others use generic forms of encryption such as SSL or TLS, or deploy a third party VPN (Virtual Private Network) security product to connect to the service to the necessary web-server. FIG. 1 illustrates the prior art use of a wireless input device (“WID”) running a generic micro-browser the output for which is in WTLS, communicating by radio means, typically a cellular network, through an Internet Authentication Services (“IAS”) Server that authenticates the wireless user who is provided with access to the internet, through a WAP gateway that must convert from WTLS to TLS before transfer over the Internet, to a web-server that is relatively exposed to attack because Port 80 remains “open” in order for a web-server to be accessible round the clock for requests from unknown sources, and by virtue of which so-called crackers have a point of access to anything logically connected to web-servers. Use of such system to provide LAN Admin services is necessarily risky because the web-server must have access to the LAN in order to pass Admin instructions from a WID to any server on that LAN. It is therefore desirable not to use a web-server for network administration applications.
Proxy technology is well-known in the computing industries as a means to reduce the number of points of access by or to a LAN from the Internet. For example, commonly, proxy technologies are used as a “gateway” permitting client devices that are “sealed off” from the Internet a trusted agent that can access the Internet on their behalf, such gateway often running with a firewall positioned as a barrier to crackers. In the case of a proxy gateway the proxy technology has been applied as a “stand-in” or “proxy” for the client. In another example of a common use for proxy technology the “proxy” is applied for a server wherein caches of files that are popular are loaded onto a proxy server to fill requests for files originally from a machine that may be slower or more expensive to operate. In both cases, the true concept of proxy technology is based on a machine that actually does something on behalf of another machine, unlike a router that merely makes connections between end points permitting the machines at those points to conduct their own affairs.
FIG. 2 illustrates the prior art use of an intermediate server (as a router) to eliminate the use of a web-server and the WAP gap. However, even these newer technologies suffer a number of disadvantages. For example, such newer conventional means for wireless network admin rely on the generic, industry standard SSH (Secure Shell) protocol and its security layer SSL both of which are vulnerable to crackers. Further, SSH is interpreted character by character, causing a large volume of data transfer and work on the client WID interpreting messages sent using the SSH protocol, neither of which is desirable in the narrow-bandwidth, low-capacity world of portable computing devices. Similarly, SSL can only run on an SSL-enabled WID and requires that security operations (as well as device management, and service functionality) be performed by the managed entity (e.g., a server on the LAN having business processes that it must run and that are thereby already consuming processor power or other system resources) running the SSH service. Consequently, even though some conventional SSH technologies include a machine intermediate the firewall and the LAN, that machine is restricted to operate as a router rather than as a true proxy, since its purpose (even though it may be implemented with some gateway functionality) is to provide a single point of entry through the firewall, eliminating the need for a different port in the firewall to be opened for each managed entity requiring access to WIDs outside the firewall.
Typically, an SSH-based client is installed on each WID for communication with a machine that is not a web-server, but which merely (like a router) forwards network administration traffic without further processing, screening or handling—directly to the managed entities. Disadvantageously, in order to handle SSH-based traffic each managed entity must run an SSH service. The use of SSH to deliver operating system (“OS”) level calls to each managed entity is very restrictive, limiting the variety of operations that may be executed from SSH without an additional soft agent to convert from and enhance the older style command line interface of SSH. SSH is also known as “Secure Shell”, a UNIX™ shell program for providing secure encrypted communication between untrusted hosts over an insecure network for the purpose of logging into, and executing commands on a remote computing device. However, although SSH is available as a service for Microsoft Windows® and UNIX™ servers, if the SSH service is not running on the managed entity at the time access by the WID is required, or the managed entity is not responding at all (e.g., the administrative service is required because of a runaway process, or an overloaded CPU), then there is no way to communicate with the subject managed entity using SSH.
SSH is a limited industry standard protocol requiring a separate application to extend the number of commands that may be executed and the administrative work that may be performed when using it. Although the SSH Command Line interface is very powerful, it is very keystroke oriented and requires a highly-skilled operator to apply it effectively, especially using the small keyboard and screen of a typical handheld WID. Although it is possible to write a program to run a WMI (Microsoft Windows Management Instrumentation) command within SSH and then use SSH to execute the program on a managed entity, it is very difficult to do. For standard admin applications that do not expose all functionality through the command line (e.g., accessing Microsoft Windows' mailboxes, rebooting a Microsoft Windows® server) it is very awkward to use those applications via SSH. Despite the fact that macros or batch files can be written to reduce the typing required to execute a particular function, those macros must also be stored on the WID and the managed entity.
SSH is basically an encrypted version of TELNET, which are the only ways to remotely access UNIX™ servers for admin purposes—making them not only helpful, but also necessary. Unfortunately, SSH is also an extremely dangerous service to leave running on a server since its expert user, command line access design is very powerful and unforgiving—potentially allowing essential files to be deleted and wiped from drives that may also be reformatted with no “user friendly” warnings, backups, or means for recovery. Consequently, many network administrators will not permit SSH services to run on their networks and it is desirable to implement network administration without resort to SSH.
Disadvantageously, whenever the need to deliver these services wirelessly arises, Telnet and SSH are very powerful tools that can be misused to cause great disruption to the network on which they run. Conventionally, in order to access Telnet/SSH remotely there are three options: 1) open a port in the firewall for each managed entity, 2) use a server to act as a router, or 3) open one port for one Telnet/SSH server and have users Telnet/SSH from one server to another. In all 3 cases the security of the system relies on the strength of the well-known, well-understood SSH model based on a simple user ID and password. To enhance that conventional security model: the firewall can be configured to allow access to the Telnet/SSH port only via restricted IP (Internet Protocol) addresses, or a VPN solution can be used to tunnel between a remote location and the Telnet server. Many companies find the firewall solution too restrictive and the VPN solution too complex or costly. Consequently, there is a need for a solution to securely deliver Telnet services remotely to a point behind a firewall for a reasonable price.
Authentication is the process of attempting to confirm whether an entity (e.g., a device or a user) is, in fact, what or who it has been declared to be. Authentication is commonly done using identifier (e.g., user name) password combinations, the knowledge of which is presumed to guarantee that the user is authentic. Each user's password is initially registered, providing a measure of verification. However passwords can thereafter be stolen, intercepted, accidentally revealed, or forgotten. The more levels of authentication, the higher the level of confidence that the entity successfully providing all “keys” is authentic. Logically, authentication precedes authorization although they may often appear to be combined. Authorization is the process of confirming that an entity has permission to do or have something, for example, to give certain commands or to access to specific managed entities (e.g., servers) or files. A person of skill in the art would understand that authorization may take place at any or all of the network operating system (NOS), computer operating system (OS), or application levels.
Typically authentication takes place without encryption, the keys for which may be negotiated once the host confirms the identity of the entity being authenticated. Typically authentication is carried out for the user alone and not for the device, which, in the context of mobile devices, has the disadvantage of permitting stolen devices to remain a threat against which there is no direct protection. It is therefore desirable to engage authentication means respecting mobile input devices. A hardware element commonly referred to as a “dongle” is one known means for uniquely identifying computing devices.
Integrity, in terms of data and network security, is the assurance that information has only been accessed or modified by persons authorized to do so. Common network administration measures to ensure data integrity include the use of checksums to detect changes to file content.
The OSI or “Open Systems Interconnection” model comprises seven (7) specific functional layers, being: Application, Presentation, Session, Transport, Network, Data Link and Physical. Two of those layers (Session and Transport) are particularly important to wireless network administrators because it is at these layers that security problems arise when using only the generic forms of processing, created for end users (i.e., not Administrators) completing business transactions, are misapplied in order to enjoy flexible access for an Administrator's tool. IP is considered to be at the Network Layer, while TCP is at the Transport Layer. The higher level Application, Presentation and Session Layers (where FTP/SMTP/TELNET/SNMP/NFS/RPC run) combined are commonly referred to as the Process Layer, consequently FTP, SMTP, and TELNET are said to “run over” TCP and IP.
Transport Control Protocol (“TCP”) has been designed to be reliable, meaning that all (i.e., none missing) data packets will arrive in sequence and error-free. Internet Protocol (“IP”) has been designed to establish a “session” connecting remote stations and to maintain that session until all of the required data packets have been transferred. Although not all implementations of TCP/IP are alike, it is the use of a standard form of TCP/IP that permits a wide range of networks to share information regardless of the physical connection or hardware involved. Despite the difference between “dialects” of TCP/IP each dialect has a generic base that includes FTP (file), SMTP (mail) and TELNET (for terminal emulation). The combination TCP/IP is necessary to use the Internet to move commands between a mobile client and a managed entity—whether presentation is in HTML, WML, or through a GUI, and whether security is achieved using generic SSL, TLS, or WTLS, or through a security model—consequently, it is desirable to ensure that whatever is output by the WID is in a form that requires minimal processing to “run over” TCP/IP.
HTML and more recently XML are OSI Presentation Layer languages including a full suite of formatting commands recognized by generic browser clients for general use on modern desktops and other powerful machines having broadband access to the Internet. XML and WML are presentation language options neither of which is necessary unless a generic browser or microbrowser is involved in the system.
TLS is replacing SSL, in the OSI Transport Layer, as the industry standard for encryption when using TCP/IP to move packets securely across the Internet. Since most web content development now contemplates broadband access, in order to enhance performance on low-power, limited-capacity, narrowband wireless devices, WAP has evolved as a subset of rules permitting wireless devices to more efficiently access such graphics-heavy content. WML (Wireless Markup Language) is a set of Presentation Layer commands based on XML and HTML, intended for use in specifying content (and a scaled down user interface) for narrowband devices for which reduced graphic content is appropriate. WTLS (Wireless Transport Layer Security) is the WAP variation on TLS available for use as the Transport Layer standard for generic security during the “wireless leg” of transmissions between a client and a managed entity. However, WTLS is not required for carrier dependent transmission to occur, which various implementations of WDP achieve without encryption being applied at the socket level. For example, a simple wireless device sending public information not needing to be encrypted could be used to send presentation instructions written in HTML to a web-server for display. The characters comprising the HTML would be processed for transmission in accordance with the radio carrier's particular radio network (and WDP) on the other end of which radio network they would be “de-processed” in preparation for uploading to “run over” TCP/IP across the Internet, without security. In the more common example of a sensitive message originating on a wireless device, characters written in WML (but they could be in HTML) would be encrypted at the socket level (as opposed to by the client application per se) using (generic) WTLS and then also processed in accordance with the carrier's particular radio network for transmission over the wireless portion of the journey to the message's destination. Upon reception at the radio carrier's tower, the message must be de-processed from the earlier radio network specific processing—and then also decrypted from WTLS (for conversion to TLS), since current technologies do not permit WTLS encrypted packets to be sent over the Internet on TCP/IP. Decryption from WTLS takes place on a WAP Gateway (typically supplied by an Internet carrier) that is inherently “public” in nature. It is during the time between the decryption from WTLS and re-encryption to TLS that a “gap” in security occurs that has become known as the “WAP gap”. During the interstitial period the characters in WML would sit in an unencrypted form on the WAP Gateway exposed to so-called “sniffers” or other tools used by crackers to “listen” to known weak points in the Internet for subject matter of interest. Even though TLS and WTLS are “strong encryption” options, neither of them is necessary if an alternate means of security has been implemented to avoid the WAP gap. It is therefore desirable, particularly for network administration applications, to transmit information and commands using a system that does not rely on WTLS alone for security.
An application programming interface” (“API”) is the set of calling conventions by which an application such as a network administration client accesses the operating system (“OS”) and other services. There are currently three conventional programming interfaces that permit network operators to access Microsoft Windows® operating systems for the purpose of providing administrative commands to managed entities: WIN32, ADSI and WMI (CIM). Conventional remote administration technology delivers commands (e.g., reboot), through a web-server, using these interfaces directly to the managed entity that executes without further enquiry—such that a risk of the unauthorized deliver of such commands exists. A person of skill in the art would understand that various of these may be implemented as a device driver rather than a memory-resident program.
There are currently three main problems associated with using wireless technology to remotely administer a computing network. First, the need to transmit signals through open space creates a security problem because the signals are susceptible to interception. Second, the narrow bandwidth of current input device technology (e.g., pagers, PDAs, phones) makes data exchange slow. Third, the fragile connectivity of current radio communication networks makes data exchange unreliable. Both slow and unreliable data exchange are severe practical limits on the administrative services deliverable.
To reduce the amount of data being transferred between a WID and its server, one conventional approach is to store more (LAN) information on the WID, which disadvantageously creates a serious security risk to the LAN in the event that the highly-portable WID is stolen. It is therefore desirable to provide a solution that requires neither extensive transfers nor the storage of LAN data.
Conventionally authentication takes place without encryption, the keys for which may be negotiated once the host confirms the identity of the entity being authenticated. Authentication is also carried out for the user alone and not for the device, which in the context of mobile devices has the disadvantage of permitting stolen devices to remain a threat against which there is no direct protection. It is therefore desirable to engage authentication means respecting the mobile input devices as well.
The prior art respecting the wireless administration of networks has concentrated on teaching variations on the application of generic access and security technologies.